Is the the democratic movement in Hong Kongan imperialist plot?

To: Detroit Workers' Voice
mailing list
October 24, 2014
RE: Against the vilification of the democratic movement in Hong
Kong

A major problem today is that so many struggles around the world for
democracy are denigrated by left-wing groups in the name of opposing US
imperialism. We have seen this in the fevered efforts of a large part
of the left to denounce many struggles and present them as alleged
imperialist plots: the ongoing struggle of the Syrian masses against
the Assad dictatorship in Syria; the overthrow of the Qaddafi
dictatorship in Libya; the overthrow of the ultra-corrupt president
Yanukovych in Ukraine; and so on. A good refutation of this with
respect to Hong Kong appeared on the website Mary Scully Reports,
and is reproduced here with the kind permission of Mary Scully:

A rebuttal to those who vilify the democracy movement in Hong Kong
by Mary Scully, October 23, 2014

Many articles insist the Hong Kong democracy movement is orchestrated bythe
US State Department, because the National Endowment for Democracy
(NED)--which is a US government agency likely chock full of CIA
operatives--fed money to some organizations & activists. Those who
make these allegations have read too many John LeCarre novels or
listened too much to Alex Jones--& have participated in politics
too little. Of course the US government is involved; they have vested
interests in the outcome. But suggesting these protests are CIA street
theater rather than a profound social movement for democracy is
politically shabby
& plays into the hands of reaction.

The CIA & other US agencies have a long-standing policy of
interveningin
political movements all over the world. There are volumes written on
this, some books now decades old. All the most important social
movements (including the US Civil Rights, women's, labor, antiwar,
& socialist movements) are/were infiltrated by provocateurs using
bribery, blackmail, & other corrupting practices. It's what
undercover
operatives do. That does does mean the entire movement is compromised
nor does it render the entire movement bankrupt.

Too much has been written by conspiracy thinkers claiming the Arab uprisings
are a sting operation of Mossad & the CIA; many circulated rumors
that the Brazil anti-World Cup protests of millions were taken over by
fascists; competing political forces have made a cacophony of
dissenting analyses of Syria & the Ukraine. Now, based on a shred
of evidence & massive speculation, some are on a band wagon
denouncing
the Hong Kong movement because the NED dished out dough to some
participants. Does it surprise anyone that Beijing is making the exact
same claim?

Some people who make these claims about the Hong Kong protests are
Maoists, shamelessly attempting to cover for the undemocratic regime in
China. Many are libertarian thinkers who have no respect for working
people as the agents of social transformation & think they are only
pawns in international espionage. Where will this nonsense end!? Those
who don't recognize the compelling realities of a mass social movement
demanding democracy need to get out of the game & take up
crocheting. Conspiracy models of social uprisings serve reaction, not
justice. In many ways it's just a shade away from the Zionist claim
that Hamas rockets are the problem in Gaza rather than Israeli
apartheid &
ethnic cleansing.

In 1968, the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia to suppress the movement
for democracy called the Prague Spring. Both Soviet & capitalist
media reported the movement as anti-socialist--of course because that
deceit served the interests of both. It justified suppression for the
USSR & it discredited socialism for the US. But
what the movement was demanding was democracy; they wanted democratic
freedoms & the end of a police state. The point of the comparison
is that misrepresenting & discrediting progressive movements is an
old
game that always plays into the hands of reaction, undercuts
solidarity,
& buttresses continued tyranny.

So who are these protesters in Hong Kong? They're students, union organizations,
& unaffiliated working people. Likely a section of
them are even anti-communist & identify capitalism as democratic.
Call it heresy, but that doesn't invalidate their struggle for
democratic suffrage one iota. They've been out on the street now for
nearly three weeks (since Sept. 28th), setting up an Occupy encampment
in Admiralty, the central business district & venue of financial
institutions
& government buildings. They also set up encampment in Mong Kok, a
major commercial district with high end retailers & catering to the
tourist & entertainment industry, particularly the sex industry,
with brothels, massage parlors, nightclubs, & bars run by criminal
cartels.

Democracy activists paralyzed commerce & traffic in both districts
with makeshift
metal, bamboo, & umbrella barricades. Since billions of dollars of
business are transacted in Hong Kong & at least 44 banks
were closed due to protests, business analysts are worried about the
negative economic impact of the protests. Some alarmists speak of the
need for financial markets to move to Singapore to escape the
instability; some are concerned foreign investors will shy off. A few
expressed indignation at the illegal character of the protests which
defy a local ordinance that protests of more than 50 people must have
police permits. It's a good thing those analysts are good are making
money because they stink at politics.This could be taken as a petulant
& pissy
complaint. But of course, it's because they answer to the capitalist
tycoons who run Hong Kong like a mafia. What's regrettable is they
differ so little from the Chinese "socialist" regime.

The People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Chinese government, issued
a condemnation on October 1st which also calls the movement "an illegal
gathering" which is "disrupting social order & harming Hong Kong’s
economic livelihood." It goes on to threaten that if the protests
continue the "consequences will be unimaginable." When you have the
untenable situation of Hong Kong called "one country, two systems"
& you can't tell the difference between the two political systems,
& when
you have ostentatious wealth juxtaposed to thousands living in basement
chicken coops, you gotta ask, 'just where does the socialist side of
that equation manifest'? And you have the cauldron that foments
revolution.

It's not certain which of the two systems governs Hong Kong's riot cops because
they act just like the ones at Tiananmen Square in 1989 &
those we've experienced in all the political uprisings around the
world. Starting last Tuesday, police using pepper spray & tear gas
moved
on the Admiralty & Mong Kok encampments, drove out the protesters,
&
armed with bolt cutters, chainsaws, & sledgehammers, dismantled the
barricades.

Media has been reporting about scuffles between democracy activists
& disgruntled
local residents or supporters of the Beijing regime who
counter-protest, attempt to remove the barricades blocking the streets,
& attack the protesters. Let's get real! They're more likely to be
goon squads hired by the brothel owners or bouncers at the local strip
clubs than neighborhood people or political reactionaries.
Multinational businesses can't ply potential clients with booze &
prostitutes if
they have to traverse barricades & encampments to get to the
brothels.

Protesters using the umbrellas that have come to symbolize their movement
as weapons & shields against pepper spray & tear gas
battled with riot cops & retook Mong Kok on Saturday morning. They
retook
Mong Kok, but do the protesters stand a chance of forcing the regime's
hand? Will political power in Hong Kong remain in the hands of a tiny
elite of capitalist tycoons in league with the undemocratic regime in
Beijing? Maybe for now they will only squeak out minor concessions;
maybe Beijing will continue to let capitalist tycoons run the place.
But a movement has emerged, the forces of social transformation have
assembled. If that wasn't making Beijing & the tycoons sweat
bullets, Beijing would not have put up an internet firewall to prevent
millions of discontent Chinese on the mainland from witnessing the
undoing of the monstrosity called "one country, two systems."

The above article is lively and pointed, and deserves a wide readership. However,
we believe that the same solidarity should be extended to the difficult
struggle against the Assad dictatorship in Syria. Mary Scully Reports (MSR),
however, is inconsistent. The above article seems to parallel the
defense of the democratic movement in Hong Kong to the defense of the
Arab Spring, yet MSR has had a standoffish attitude to the
struggle in Syria, barely mentioning it, and when doing so, regarding
the antics of Bill and Hillary Clinton as more notable then the defense
of Kobane or the entire heroic, bloody, protracted struggle of the
Syrian masses. (See http://www.maryscullyreports.com/honoring-the-children-of-syria/) If MSR
reported on Hong Kong in the same way it reports on Syria, it would
conclude with an appeal for Americans to demonstrate under the slogan
"US-NED, hands off China!"

MSR has two standards: one for Hong Kong, and another for elsewhere,whereas
we have one standard for the entire world: support for the present
democratic struggles, combined with recognition of the inevitable
limited nature of their outcomes. Everywhere around the world the
democratic forces face the interference of outside bourgeois and
imperialist forces, and yet these struggles are necessary. And
everywhere around the world the present struggles will not end
exploitation, but only serve as partial (but essential) steps forward,
that when successful bring the masses into a wider political life, but
don't end their exploitation.